DLMSO 

MEMORANDUM FOR: SEE DISTRIBUTION

SUBJECT: Defense Logistics Management Standards (DLMS) Supply 

Process Review Committee (PRC) Meeting 99-1, 

January 25-27, 1999

The attached minutes of the DLMS Supply PRC Meeting 99-1 are

forwarded for your information and appropriate action.

The 99-2 Supply PRC meeting is tentatively scheduled for 

April 20-22, 1999.

The Defense Logistics Management Standards Office points 

of contact are Supply PRC Co-Chairs: Ms. Ellen Hilert, at 

(703)275-5271, DSN 235-5271 or e-mail: ellen_hilert@hq.dla.mil; 

and Ms. Mary Jane Johnson, (703)275-5266, DSN 235-5266, or 

e-mail: maryjane_johnson@hq.dla.mil.

JAMES A. JOHNSON

Director

Defense Logistics Management

Standards Office

Attachment

DISTRIBUTION:

ADUSD(L)MDM

Supply PRC Representatives and Attendees 
DLMSO 

 

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD

SUBJECT: Defense Logistics Management Standards (DLMS) Supply 

Process Review Committee (PRC) Meeting 99-1, 

January 25-27, 1999

Purpose: The Defense Logistics Management Standards Office 

(DLMSO) hosted the subject meeting at the Headquarters Complex, 

Ft. Belvoir, VA. Specific discussion topics are noted below. A 

list of attendees is shown at Enclosure 1. 

Brief Summary of Discussion: Ms. Ellen Hilert and Ms. Mary 

Jane Johnson, Supply PRC Co-Chairs, and Ms. Vermella Savage, 

MILSTRIP Administrator, facilitated discussion.

Review of Meeting Topics:

a. Air Force Policy Change for Reporting Assets under 

Defense Program for Redistribution of Assets (DEPRA). Pat 

Cronin, AF ILSP, informed the PRC of recent changes in AF 

reporting of excess consumable assets where AF is the Primary 

Inventory Control Activity (PICA). The AF is no longer sending 

reports of excess to DEPRA for these assets since recent 

improvements to the AF systems now provide full visibility of 

these assets supporting the Joint Total Asset Visibility (JTAV). 

Reporting of additional AF owned assets will be discontinued 

under DEPRA as JTAV improvements are fielded. This change 

negates the colateral agreement with the Army and Navy for 

inter-Service free redistribution within EUCOM and PACOM. 

Redistribution under JTAV requires reimbursement. The AF was 

not able to successfully measure the impact of this change, and 

the Army and Navy may wish to pursue this with the Defense 

Automatic Addressing System Center (DAASC). Further, with the 

absence of a reciprocal agreement, the Army and Navy may wish to 

pursue changes to what assets they make available to the AF 

under DEPRA.

Action: DLMSO must update DEPRA procedures under the MILSTRIP 

Supplement.

b. Draft Change Proposal for DAAS Edit of All DoD 

Requisitions for Invalid/Expired CJCS Project Codes. The AF 

briefed the PRC at the 98-3 meeting on the highly successful 

implementation of a DAASC edit on AF requisitions for proper 

CJCS project codes. By request of the AF, DAASC rejects the 

invalid requisitions with a clear text explanation. By request 
2

of the PRC, the AF documented their unique validation and 

submitted a change proposal for DoD-wide validation. The 

proposal suggested a PRC determination on the appropriateness of 

rejection or acceptance with modification of invalid 

requisitions. After discussion, the PRC agreed that the 

requisitions should not be rejected. When the proposal is 

staffed it will reflect a BK status (with a modified MILSTRIP 

definition) back to the submitter and continued processing of 

the requisition minus the project code. The proposal will also 

reflect assignment of a new status code with a definition 

specific to the project code for later use under the DLMS. 

Action: DLMSO will discuss with the J4 their acceptance of 

responsibility for the providing a list of valid Project Codes 

and future updates to the DAASC in a manner similar to the 

authorized DoDAACs under Approved Change 9A/Addendum. It was 

noted that future plans should include use of a single source 

for identification and validation. Consideration will also be 

given to the addition of the invalid project code transactions 

to the unauthorized priority designator report. Barring 

unforeseen problems, the proposal will be released for staffing 

in this quarter.

c. Draft Change Proposal for Removal of All Air Force 

"FX" Accounts from the DoD Materiel Obligation Validation (MOV) 

Program. DLA strenuously objected to the requested 

circumventing of the MOV program as it is a proven method of 

validating requirements saving millions in cost avoidance. 

Although it appears that numerous FX accounts are already 

exempted by Air Force under a long-standing DAASC programming 

provision, there appears to be little validity to the argument 

that these accounts should be exempted due to either volume or 

the presumed manual effort to support the MOV. 

Action: AF will investigate other options.

d. Draft Change Proposal for Removal of All Air Force 

"FM" Accounts from the DoD Materiel Obligation Validation (MOV) 

Program. This proposal would exempt the AF medical accounts 

from the MOV process until the planned 2003 fielding of a new 

automated system. Again, DLA objected to the requested 

exemption. The AF reported that a significant number of 

cancellations of valid requirements occurred under the MOV 

program due to nonresponse to the MOV request. The AF was 

advised to research the cause of the nonreceipt of the MOV 

request so that valid responses can be submitted rather than 

disabling the process.

Action: AF will investigate options.
3

e. DLMS Implementation. LTC Richard Modell, DLMSO, was 

introduced as the Chair of the IPT for Adoption of Commercial 

Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) Standards for DoD Logistics 

Business Practices. The mission of the IPT is to develop a 

phased implementation plan that moves the DoD to commercial 

logistics EDI standards. The kick-off meeting of the IPT was 

held January 20, 1999. LTC Modell summarized for the PRC the 

objectives and taskings addressed at that meeting. For detailed 

information on the IPT refer to the IPT web page at 

www.log.edi.migration.hq.dla.mil.

f. DLMS Mapping. The chairs shared with the PRC an 

improved format for the DLSS to DLMS mapping found in the 

supplement to the DLMS manual. The 511 Requisition sample was 

distributed showing greater detail in mapping and explanation of 

embedded data and multi-use fields. The revised supplement will 

also provide greater detail listing available enhancements under 

the DLMS. 

Action: The revised supplement will be posted to the web when 

complete. No provisions are currently planned for distributing 

hard-copy revisions to the manual. Once updated to the 4010 

baseline, DLMSO will pursue complete reissuance of the manual. 

Also, DLMSO will determine status of DLMS equivalent of the 

MILSCAP PJJ transaction (question forwarded through DAASC for 

Navy).

g. DLMS/DLSS Semiannual Status Report. The status of 

Service/Agency reports is as follows: Navy, Marine Corps, DLA 

and GSA reports outstanding; Army in work/draft provided; AF 

received. The PRC reviewed individual changes to determine 

which may be implemented on a staggered basis. 

Action: Components will continue efforts to complete reporting. 

DLMSO will post implementation status to the web as available. 

h. Draft Change Proposals Supporting Defense 

Security Assistance Management System (DSAMS). Pat Craig of 

the Defense Security Assistance Development Center (DSADC) 

presented five change proposals for PRC review and comment:

1. Establishment of New MILSTRIP Transactions, 

Advice Codes, and Status Codes for an Automated Price Quote 

Process. The PRC suggested that the DSADC investigate using 

ANSI procurement transactions vice proprietary MILSTRIP 

transactions for DSAMS price quote interaction with the

Commercial Buying Service. 
4

2. Establishment of New MILSTRIP Transaction 

for Suspension of Security Assistance requisitions and New 

Supply Status Codes to Report Results of the Suspension Request.

DSADC will rework this proposal to include supporting procedures 

(e.g. depot action to segregate stock).

3. Revised Requisition Modification Criteria 

and New Advice Code for Security Assistance. DSADC was advised 

to investigate use of ANSI (860 Purchase Order Change Request) 

for this purpose.

4. Establishment of New MILSTRIP Advice Code 

for Shelf Life Materiel Destined for a FMS customer. DLA voiced 

concerns that the proposed capability to request new procurement 

for shelf-life items would undermine the existing procedures. 

It would allow material purchased to support programmed 

requirements to remain in DLA stock while new material is bought 

to fill the requisition impacting stock rotation and eventually 

impacting overall prices if the new material continued to be 

sold at standard price. To reduce the negative impact, it was 

suggested that the proposal be modified to support requests for 

new shelf-life material at "market price." The additional cost 

might dissuade FMS customers from routinely requesting new 

material.

5. Establishment of New MILSTRIP Supply Status 

Codes for Security Assistance Requisitions. DLMSO will assist 

DSADC in modifying this proposal to reflect appropriate DLMS 

mapping for the supplemental information to be passed with the 

new status codes. If DSADC desires, they may address 

nonstandard placement of this information with the 80 rp 

transaction. 

i. Processing Cooperative Logistics Supply Support 

Arrangement (CLSSA) Requisitions. Ms. Betty Holden, U.S. Army 

Security Assistance Command, requested that the PRC reopen 

approved DLMS Change 40 to expand the applicability of Not 

Mission Capable Supply (NMCS) and Anticipated of Not Mission 

Capable Supply (ANMCS) beyond CLSSA to all FMS requisitions. 

The PRC reiterated its earlier agreement that the Components 

move to implement change 40 which standardizes the application 

of NMCS/special transportation/handling coding among the 

Components. Any new requirement to expand coverage should be 

submitted as a new proposal. Additionally, in development of 

the proposed change, consideration should be given to impact on 

DoD 5105.38-M, Security Assistance Management Manual, policy for 

filling FMS requisitions at or below the reorder point.

j. Issues Relevant to Approved DLSS/DLMS Change 9A 
5

w/Addendum, Validation of F/AD I Activities. This change 

implemented validation of F/AD I requisitions using a table of 

authorized activity DoDAACs maintained at the DAASC. Beginning 

on September 1, 1998, requisitions reflecting unauthorized use 

of the associated priority designators were output to a report. 

Components were to evaluate the process and consider moving to 

automatic downgrading four months after implementation.

k. Performance Evaluation and General Issues. The 

PRC agreed to postpone evaluation until the 99-2 meeting. This 

delay will allow the Services to adjust the list of authorized 

activities in accordance with newly defined F/AD criteria and 

the annual review directed by J4. It was noted that there is 

continued abuse incurred by civil agencies which the General 

Services Administration (GSA) is attempting to resolve. The AF 

requested clarification of contractor authorization for F/AD I 

and contractor representation on the Master Urgency List (MUL). 

In response, J4 will provide an informal brief on the MUL 

categories (CUE-CAP and BRICK-BAT) at the 99-2 meeting.

2. Report Format, Sort Sequence. The detail 

report lists requisitions in sequence by DoDAAC. This makes 

working with the report somewhat difficult for the AF. The AF 

will work with DAASC to determine the best way to obtain report 

data in a more usable sequence (sort by major command). DLMSO 

will look into suggesting possible enhancements to increase 

"user-friendliness." 

3. Automatic Downgrading on a Selected Basis. 

Shortly after implementation of Change 9A, the U.S. Coast Guard 

requested that DAASC begin automatic downgrading of USCG 

requisitions which fail validation. DAASC advised the USCG to 

first seek a DoD solution to the method of implementing 

automatic downgrading and the USCG prepared a draft change 

proposal for PRC review. The PRC found no reason to delay the 

DAASC downgrading requested by the USCG.

Action: DLMSO will modify the draft proposal in accordance with 

PRC suggestions. As with the project code proposal above, the 

proposal will reflect a BK status (with modified MILSTRIP 

definition) back to the submitter and continued processing of 

the requisition. The proposal will also reflect assignment of a 

new status code with a definition specific to the PD for later 

use under the DLMS and the output report will be modified to 

show downgraded requisitions. DAASC will implement automatic 

downgrading for the USCG.

l. Project Code 3AB Discussion. This project code is 

used for material shipments to a designated activity for repair 
6

and return or shipment as directed under a DMISA. The Army 

reported that there is a problem determining upon receipt at DLA 

depots which condition is applicable. It was proposed that the 

current repair and return meaning be retained for 3AB and a new 

code assigned for DMISA use thus minimizing the impact of the 

change. 

Action: The Components were asked to check for possible "hardcoding" of the 3AB within their systems and respond by February 

8, 1999. If such hard-coding is not reported, DLMSO will 

proceed with assignment of a new code and separation of the 

definition.

m. Logistics Response Time (LRT) Steering Group 

Exploring New Metrics. Mr. Terry Trepal, DUSD(L), informed the 

PRC of a proposed new LRT measurement for on-time deliveries 

based upon the customer required delivery date (RDD). The 

committee discussed at some length the inappropriateness of 

such a measurement. The true RDD date is not a routine entry, 

being required for subsistence requisitions only. Additionally, 

certain RDDs would be ignored by supply systems programmed to 

schedule delivery based upon the PD in accordance with Uniform 

Material Movement and Issue Priority System (UMMIPS). A 

preliminary DAASC inquiry to determine RDD usage has already 

been requested, however, Mr. Trepal will report the admonitions 

voiced at this meeting to the LRT group and those initiating 

the action.

n. Weapons System Coding. Postponed until 99-2 

meeting. At that time, DLA will provide a WSDB demonstration 

and report status pursuant to DLA study (Task Order >Assessing 

the Feasibility for Providing Integrated Data Access to Weapon 

System Data=). 

o. EMALL Demonstration and Discussion. Mr. Steve 

Bohn and Mr. Damond Osterhus, contractors supporting DoD EMALL 

development, provided a detailed demonstration and briefing on 

the electronic catalog and ordering system which has been 

operational since January 1998. Using EMALL, customers can view 

descriptive information and obtain stock availability prior to 

placing orders for purchase by IMPAC card or interfund payment. 

Orders are filled from depot stocks or under direct vendor 

delivery contracts. The JECPO is working with the Services to 

increase EMALL flexibility in an effort to gain greater 

acceptance of the new system. Two draft change proposals 

supporting EMALL were presented to the PRC for review and 

comment:

1. In-The-Clear Addressing for MILSTRIP-Based 

Requisitions. Currently, MILSTRIP restricts use of in-the-clear 
7

ship-to addressing to specified exception situations. MILSTRIP 

further directs use of DoDAACs for repetitive shipments and 

instructs Components to assign DoDAACs for each receiving 

location. This request would extend in-the-clear addressing 

capability to EMALL customers allowing them to direct shipments 

to any location. After discussion, it was agreed that the 

proposal would be formally staffed. In the interim, DLA will 

proceed with a test of this functionally using trailer 

transactions to forward the address to the ICP and depot 

automated systems. The customer identification will also be 

provided on the trailer for retention on the DLA record. The 

test will be restricted to IMPAC card purchases due to concern 

regarding security for interfund purchases and potential for 

fraud. The PRC expressed concern for potential noncompliance 

with material receipt acknowledgement procedures and difficulty 

managing LRT data without a DoDAAC to identify the ship-to 

activity.

2. Use of Surrogate DoDAAC for USAF EMALL. 

Under this proposal, AF EMALL customers would use a surrogate 

DoDAAC for registration and ordering of non-weapons system coded 

items for payment by IMPAC card. A single (or multiple 

surrogate DoDAACs representing AF Major Commands) would simplify 

the EMALL process for non-supply personnel. The EMALL system 

will retain the customer account name for information purposes. 

The PRC expressed concern for unforeseen problems down the road, 

particularly in obtaining management information, where the 80 

rp transaction used in current systems no longer identifies 

either the ship-to location or the requisitioner. It was noted, 

however, that no proposal or waiver would be required to 

implement this change. The AF need only register the desired 

DoDAAC(s) with DAASC through the appropriate AF channels and 

instruct EMALL designers to construct the MILSTRIP document 

number using this DoDAAC. Once registered with DAASC, DoD 

systems will accept the DoDAAC as valid, regardless of its 

artificial nature. 

Action: DLMSO will staff the proposal for in-the-clear ship-to 

addressing. DLA will work with EMALL designers to resolve 

processing issues for the testing phase. AF should carefully 

consider ramifications of pursuing use of a surrogate DoDAAC(s) 

for EMALL customers.

k. Next Meeting. The 99-2, Supply PRC meeting is 

tentatively scheduled for April 20-22, 1999. The agenda will 

include an EDI IPT report, E-Mall topics, Weapons Systems 

Designator demonstration by DLA, F/AD I validation evaluation, 

MUL presentation by J4, and change proposal resolution as 

needed.
8

 

 

ELLEN HILERT

Supply PRC Co-Chair

 

MARY JANE JOHNSON

Supply PRC Co-Chair

APPROVE: 

JAMES A. JOHNSON _____________

Director, DLMSO

Enclosures
1

1